EU Study
proposes giving EU complete control over Schengen borders10.12.2014A
study carried out for the European Commission has proposed that
powers for the management and control of the external borders
of the Schengen area should be "exercised at EU level on
a permanent basis." [1]

The
study was launched "to evaluate the feasibility of the creation
of a European System of Border Guards (ESBG) for improved management
of the external borders of the Union, and to address the future
role of the Frontex Agency."

It
was conducted by the Belgian arm of consulting firm Unisys, which
also undertook the 2006 report 'Study on Conferring executive
powers on Border Officers Operation at the External borders of
the EU'. [2]

The
recent report was completed in June but not published until October.
It proposes a long-term process, in which direct EU control over
external borders is the final stage.

The
first step involves the "optimal use of existing resources"
- fully exploiting the current legal and policy framework in
order to "further increase the solidarity and burden-sharing
in the Schengen Area."

Following
this is "an intermediary step towards achieving full integration
of external border management at EU level."

An
EU-level body would take responsibility for controlling operations
in areas where large groups of people are attempting to cross
borders - "hot spots", in the terminology of the study.
It is proposed that these operations be carried out by a 'European
Border Corps'.

If
the "hot spots" system is succesfully implemented,
the third step would follow: "the development of a true
EU system of border management."

Under
this proposal, the 'European Border Corps' would be made up of
"border guards from all Schengen States who would perform
their duty under the command and control of the newly established
EU body the Committee on Schengen Border Management."

Parliamentary
opinion?

The
study presents "the gradual integration of border management"
and the "creation of the ESBG" in the long run as being
"the prevailing position at the European Parliament"
(EP).

Interviews
at the European Parliament covered the majority of parliamentary
groups but were conducted with just three MEPS (Ska Keller of
the Greens, Sylvie Guillaume of the Socialists & Democrats
and Jan Mulder of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats); two
advisors to MEPs (representing the European People's Party and
the European United Left); one political advisor to a parliamentary
group (the European United Left); and one parliamentary official.

In
contrast, representatives of 26 Member States were consulted
through questionnaires and in "focus groups" with "different
experts". 14 Frontex officials were consulted for the study,
and one representative of the European Commission.

A caveat
regarding the opinions of MEPs and parliamentary officials is
buried deep within the report's annex: "the majority of
the questioned interviews opted for a more integrated border
management approach, with the exception of environmental/social
rights oriented political groups," which presumably refers
to the Greens and the European United Left.

Cornelia
Ernst, an MEP from the German Die
Linke (The Left) party and Civil Liberties Committee coordinator
for the European Parliament grouping European United Left/Nordic
Green Left (GUE/NGL), told Statewatch:

"It
comes as no surprise that this study does not address at all
the problems we face at the European borders today. Instead,
the question of an integrated system of European border guards
is treated like a philosophical exercise. If one wants to discuss
this question in a sensible manner, one has to understand first
that it is precisely our strict border regime and surveillance
that does not allow for safe routes into the EU. I completely
fail to see how under these circumstances deeper integration
of the border guards in combination with more awareness for fundamental
rights could provide a solution to the problem we face today,
that is thousands of dead migrants in the Mediterranean."

In
an email to Statewatch a representative of GUE/NGL criticised
the methodology of the study, saying that it was "quite
clear that the EP was being interviewed at the very end of the
research," and only "because the LIBE [Civil Liberties
Committee] secretariat had insisted."

Statewatch
contacted one of the authors of the Unisys report, who said via
email that:

"the
views expressed are those of the authors... our team was left
with discretion to propose recommendations that appear the most
suitable. Thus, after presenting different views which differed
significantly from one political group to another, the team concluded
the report with what it evaluated was the most feasible and realistic
solution (i.e. a progressive step by step model implementation)."

He
added: "the visit to the EP was certainly considered of
great importance especially due to the fact that the idea of
establishing a ESBG initially originated from the EP," although
on this point the authors are mistaken.

The
Unisys report suggests that the idea of a European System of
Border Guards originated in a "report on the review of the
2004 legislation setting up Frontex," authored by former
MEP Simon Busuttil, which "proposed to study the establishment
of a European Union Border Guard System."

The
report does not contain a precise date or link to this report,
and the Unisys employee whom Statewatch
contacted apologetically said: "unfortunately, we are not
able to provide you with the link of Mr Busuttil's report, as
requested."

The
document in question is presumably a parliamentary report, for
which Busuttil was the rapporteur, on the 2011 Regulation amending
Frontex's legal basis. [3] This succesfully added provisions
to the Regulation that obliged the next evaluation of Frontex
to consider "the feasibility of the creation of a European
system of border guards."

But
it was in as far back as 2001 that the establishment of a European
Border Guard was first officially called for, by the European
Commission, [4] which subsequently co-financed a 'Feasibility
study for the setting up of a European border police'. The final
report of that study was published in 2002. [5]

Political
implications

The
political implications of handing responsibility for control
of the Schengen area's external borders to an EU committee are
significant, and according to the study:

"Participants
to focus groups meetings repeatedly insisted that the answers
for some of the questions imply making political statements.
The study team took their observation into consideration while
remaining neutral in presenting the results of the study."

The
Commission previously stated in response to questions from potential
contractors for the study that "the political feasibility
[of establishing a European System of Border Guards] is not covered
by the purpose of the tender specification" and that "the
tender specifications do not impose a limitation on a specific
model. All models can be addressed." [6]

Statewatch
asked the Commission's Directorate-General for Home Affairs (DG
HOME) its opinion on the study, and was told:

"The
Commission is currently reflecting on the possible ways to launch
the policy debate on the long-term development of the management
of the external borders of the EU. The study conducted by Unisys
and all of its content is the responsibility of the contractor
and does not represent the position of the Commission.
The Commission took note of the findings of the study."

The
Commission refused to comment on whether it considered the findings
to be politically, legally or financially realistic, merely commenting
that: "The Commission will launch in due time the policy
debate on these issues."

The
Commission paid Unisys nearly 290,000 euros for the study. Alongside
a separate evaluation of the agency, it will be used to assess
the future development of Frontex. The Commission said:

"According
to the revised Article 33 of the Frontex Regulation the first
independent evaluation will also need to address the possible
creation of a European System of border guards. That study is
ongoing and is scheduled to be completed towards mid 2015.
It is the task of the independent evaluator to take into consideration
all relevant material at its disposal to conduct the evaluation."

The
contract for the independent evaluation was awarded at the end
of August to Danish firm Rambøll Management Consulting.
[7]Further reading

&COPY; Statewatch ISSN 1756-851X.
Personal usage as private individuals/"fair dealing"
is allowed. We also welcome links to material on our site. Usage
by those working for organisations is allowed only if the organisation
holds an appropriate licence from the relevant reprographic rights
organisation (eg: Copyright Licensing Agency in the UK) with
such usage being subject to the terms and conditions of that
licence and to local copyright law.